[ad_1]
A divisional panel comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Tushar Rao Jidala asked Advocate Ashok Agarwal to show them a legal clause stating that the court can order an order from the government.
The Political Isolation Act, introduced by NGO Social Jurist, a civil rights group, alleges that private schools adopt the unethical practice of subjecting children over the age of 3 to screening procedures.
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday said that it cannot issue the mandate order to the Delhi government to expedite the finalization process of the Delhi School Education (Amendment) Bill, 2015 which is related to the prohibition of screening in the matter of admission at the pre-primary (nursery/pre-primary) level. .
A divisional panel consisting of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Tushar Rao Jidala asked Advocate Ashok Agarwal to show them a provision in the law stating that the court can order an injunction against the government.
During the hearing, Advocate Ashok Agarwal and Advocate Kumar Utkarsh representing the NGO, asserted that such a long delay in the Child Friendly Bill is totally unjustified.
Opposing the Political Impeachment Act, Permanent Adviser to the Delhi Government Santosh Kumar Tripathi told the court that when this bill was introduced in 2015, Agarwal himself organized a protest against the existing bill. And he said: “Today he says to implement this law, O my Lord!”.
In this regard, Agarwal said, “This is wrong! The protest was against a part of the bill that takes away the right of teachers under Section 10 and I have drafted this bill. After I have drafted the bill, the government has approved it. How can I protest against a bill, I have formulated it.”
“What is this Dharna doing and then registering this PIL… You are an interested person. It was our Dharna regarding this bill too. We cannot pass the authorization order to the government,” the Chief Justice said verbally.
In addition, the judge argued, “Can a constitutional court pass a warrant to the government? Where is the counter? Where is any judgment? We can’t pass a warrant! Sorry!”
“We can’t release mandamus! Name one provision where we can make an order. Please show me! There is absolutely nothing… this is not done. Under the Political Isolation Law, just throw any piece of paper at us! CJ Sharma commented.
Accordingly, the court adjourned the case to May 17 and asked Agarwal to seek instructions on the matter.
The Political Isolation Act filed by NGO Social Jurist, a civil rights group, alleges that private schools adopt the unethical practice of subjecting children over the age of 3 to screening procedures. It states, “Child Friendly Bill i.e. Delhi School Education (Amendment) Bill, 2015, which prohibits screening procedure in nursery admission in schools has been pending between Central Delhi Government and Delhi Government for the past seven years without any justification and is against interest Public and opposition to public policy.
Right to Education Act 2009, prohibits screening procedures in the matter of admission of a child to school and makes it a punishable offence. However, the law, does not apply to children under the age of 6 and therefore does not apply to admission to nursery school.
The petition also states that the admission criteria adopted by the private schools is to conduct an examination pursuant to section 2(o) of the RTE Act 2009 which is prohibited and punishable by section 13 of the RTE Act 2009.
Read all the latest news from India here
[ad_2]
